How do you define a 'COOL' car?

[ASH32]

Think of this: Would you enter a car in the cool wall knowing before hand it would be rated seriously uncool? I don't think so, thus it's not a bad things that most cars are cool cars.

I understand that and I think because it works this way, that is part of the problem with the Cool Wall currently.

What, am I supposed to vote based on what society considers cool? I have my own opinion (though flawed), thanks.

No I didn't mean that you should vote entirely on what others think, but take it into account a little, like a mixture of both your and others opinion really. It is alright having your own opinions, but here or anywhere where there is clearly a bias towards a particular subject, then if/when everyone agrees, there is very little to debate, so there would be little point to the wall if everyone votes this way.

It does depend on what we are trying to achieve here with the "Cool Wall". Are we meant to be voting on whether we think a particular car is cool and as such we will get an unbalanced board. Or are we trying to get an accurate board, because if everyone votes in a "I have my own opinion so i'll use it", sort of way, that isn't going to happen, as we are too biased to get a fair reflection of whether a car is truly cool or not, so again I cannot see the point of it all.

 

[Joey D]

I hear a lot of complaining about the cool wall but yet no one has given me a better way to do it...I'm all ears.

 

[TheCracker]

It does depend on what we are trying to achieve here with the "Cool Wall". Are we meant to be voting on whether we think a particular car is cool and as such we will get an unbalanced board. Or are we trying to get an accurate board, because if everyone votes in a "I have my own opinion so i'll use it", sort of way, that isn't going to happen, as we are too biased to get a fair reflection of whether a car is truly cool or not, so again I cannot see the point of it all.

We have to vote on what we, as individuals, think is cool or not. You can't vote on what you think other people consider cool or not can you?

That's why it's a poll, you take everyones vote and see from the results as whole which direction the majority are leaning.

How else are we ment to discover what cars are cool or not?

 

[ASH32]

We have to vote on what we, as individuals, think is cool or not. You can't vote on what you think other people consider cool or not can you?

That's why it's a poll, you take everyones vote and see from the results as whole which direction the majority are leaning.

How else are we ment to discover what cars are cool or not?

I understand what your saying and as it happens, I have voted in a matter of seconds on all my votes, without putting much thought into them at all and certainly not about what others think. I am just trying to argue that in doing this we are not actually finding out what cars are cool at all. All we are finding out is the members of GTPlanet like cars therefore most cars are cool to members and we don't really need a poll to know that.

 

[TheCracker]

I understand what your saying and as it happens, I have voted in a matter of seconds on all my votes, without putting much thought into them at all and certainly not about what others think. I am just trying to argue that in doing this we are not actually finding out what cars are cool at all. All we are finding out is the members of GTPlanet like cars therefore most cars are cool to members and we don't really need a poll to know that.

But if you are asking the members of GTPlanet which cars you think are cool, the only result you are going to get is 'which cars the members of GTPlanet think are cool'

There's no other outcome for the question posed.

Because 'being cool' is obviously down to the individual, you'd have to ask everyone in the world the question to find out what the overall (by average) answer is.

 

[Jim Prower]

That's why we discuss these cars in the threads as well, so you can make your individual opinion known. (and some of us can be quite boisterious, at that. Like...Rush Limbaugh Levels.)

Some of the most passionately argued opinions are often against the mass voting of the thread.

 

[harrytuttle]

'Cool' is intangible and undefinable, but, like the difference between art and porn, you know it when you see it.

 

[otago]

Something which is completely opposite to Toyota Camry.

I've got sick of this Toyota's owners driving half of speed limit on wavy two line roads. Why don't to buy some decent car which can hold in turns?

 

[Joey D]

Something which is completely opposite to Toyota Camry.

I've got sick of this Toyota's owners driving half of speed limit on wavy two line roads. Why don't to buy some decent car which can hold in turns?

Most people don't really want to go flying around corners quickly or do any sporty driving what-so-ever.

 

[homeforsummer]

Yep. It's not the car, it's the drivers. I doubt there are many cars for sale that are incapable of at least "pressing on" over twisty roads, even if they aren't particularly fun in the process. But there are drivers on the other hand who won't want to take them to those speeds.

I do agree with the sentiment though. Someone driving too slowly on a twisty road can be a hazard for even moderately-paced traffic. Like the old biddy in a Micra I came across once, at night, in a 60mph limit, doing 30mph. Just after a blind sweeping bend.

Which conveniently also highlights why Micras are never cool.

 

[ROAD_DOGG33J]

Like the old biddy in a Micra I came across once, at night, in a 60mph limit, doing 30mph. Just after a blind sweeping bend.

Maybe that's why he was doing 30?

 

[homeforsummer]

Biddy = old woman
Sweeping = not tight
Blind = probably overstating the matter a bit. It's only blind (due to a hedge) until you reach the threshold of the corner and as you do you can see right through it.

Regardless, 30mph is ridiculous on a 60mph main road. I doubt she was just "passing through" at past midnight so I can only assume she lives in the area and always travels that slowly...

 

[otago]

Yep. It's not the car, it's the drivers. I doubt there are many cars for sale that are incapable of at least "pressing on" over twisty roads

You should see local roads, some of them consists only from blind hairpins and 90 degrees turns and it could be 100 km/h sped limit. And sometimes road is so narrow that it doesn't even have divider line

Nobody on earth could do 100 km/h at road like this with any production car. LOL

 

[buickgnx88]

Yep. It's not the car, it's the drivers.

That's why there are so many cars with soft suspensions in the US, older people that don't want their car to shake up their hemorrhoids.

 

[otago]

Found some video of my favorite road to take a car for a spin:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lp5V7ttg754&feature=related

Camry will die there

 

[homeforsummer]

You should see local roads, some of them consists only from blind hairpins and 90 degrees turns and it could be 100 km/h sped limit. And sometimes road is so narrow that it doesn't even have divider line

Nobody on earth could do 100 km/h at road like this with any production car. LOL

You've missed my point. "Pressing on" doesn't mean doing bang on the speed limit the whole time, it just means making reasonable progress. I can fully understand someone in a big wobbly saloon not wanting to die on a twisty road but that doesn't mean they can't make reasonable progress through it. If you're going slower than a motorhome would then it's probably more a driver confidence thing than it is a car thing.

 

[otago]

I can fully understand someone in a big wobbly saloon not wanting to die on a twisty road but that doesn't mean they can't make reasonable progress through it.

So why to buy big wobbly saloon if there is no long straight lines on roads in 100 km radius around?

 

[Anghammarad]

0 Kelvin

Steaming

 

[homeforsummer]

So why to buy big wobbly saloon if there is no long straight lines on roads in 100 km radius around?

Because some people prioritise comfort. And you're still missing the point - the car will be more than capable of the roads it encounters, the driver might not be.

 

[otago]

Because some people prioritise comfort.

Priority in car comfort is handling, precise steering, fast and responsible reactions.

I don't feel any comfort when steering wheel is completely empty and you can't steer properly, you feel like blind man trying to find out your way through the corner. And two or three stage reactions, when you turn the wheel and car do nothing at first, you should wait until all this huge body rolls end, then it jumps in right direction and bouncing again, trying to get back on track.

It's not just uncomfortable, it's dangerous if you drive any fast.

 

[Famine]

Priority in car comfort is handling, precise steering, fast and responsible reactions.

There's a word missing here. Let me insert it for you:

My priority in car comfort is handling, precise steering, fast and responsible reactions.

It's not the same for everybody. That's the second point hfs is making.

 

[otago]

It's not the same for everybody. That's the second point hfs is making.

I see your point, but is it the car supposed to be a vehicle to drive at first place or it's just a coach to seat? I mean what the main function of device?

It's OK to make photos with cell phone, but buying cell phone with the main priority to make photos is kind of strange. It can't produce any good photos.

Another good example is SUV. If you consider some real ones like Landcruiser, they are designed for off road and on tarmac they are the worst kind of car you can buy for money. In California there are plenty of them, maybe 30% including tracks, and there is no rain for half an year there, so even usual AWD sedan is completely useless. Why so much people buy cars like this is a mystery of nature.

Just my thoughts, not arguing. I really feel uncomfortable in this bouncing cars with extremely light steering

 

[SRinc.]

I was thinking about this yesterday post the Mondeo 'hot or not' thread, and wondering just how a car is defined as being cool or not.

Can it be as simple as one entire brand being cool or not... eg; Ford not cool, Audi cool. Does a car have to have a certain level of performance to be considered cool (could be super fast or have sublime handling)? Are all 4 door saloons costing less than RS4 or M5 money uncool by definition? Are all red Ferraris or Yellow Lambos uncool just because they are flashy?

So how do you rate a car as being cool? What are the qualities/features/attributes that make one car cool and another that offers similar levels of functionality uncool?

What makes a car cool on the exterior, the attention and 'WOW' response it gets. Performance, the better it performs accelerating, corner, and braking the cooler it is. Put the 2 together and you get a 'cool' car.

 

[otago]

What makes a car cool on the exterior, the attention and 'WOW' response it gets. Performance, the better it performs accelerating, corner, and braking the cooler it is. Put the 2 together and you get a 'cool' car.

I think exterior prevails by huge margin. Good example, not fast car but better show stopper than Veyron would ever be:

Always wanted to see this car in some game, together with Duesenberg SSJ. Polyphony is the only hope, others tend to put in games some fancy race cars instead real cool stuff

 

[Famine]

Just my thoughts, not arguing. I really feel uncomfortable in this bouncing cars with extremely light steering

You're not the only one.

I see your point, but is it the car supposed to be a vehicle to drive at first place or it's just a coach to seat? I mean what the main function of device?

For most people? It's just a tool that gets them from where they live to where they work and back again. That's just how it is.

 

[Jim Prower]

RE: Famine thing in the GenCoupe thread:

A: I re-thought it. I'm still miffed, but since I hate Audis and SEATs on the reason that Forza2.0 ruined them for me, (and thus, am no better than he/she/it is) I should probably shut up about it.

 

[Lucas]

neanderthal posted in the same thread:

Following your logic, they could make a car thats as sexy as an Aston Martin and more capable than the R35 Skyline and it would still be uncool, because it's a Hyundai. Thats. Just. Dumb.

By that logic the Toyota 2000GT is unsexy because of the rest of the Toyta lineup at the time, the NSX for the same reason, the Miura becasue Lamborghini were making tractors, the first Corvette, the 300SL Gullwing, etc etc etc. I'd like to see your voting record vis- a- vis those models.

Retarded logic. Big fallacy in your thinking. However you want to state it.

This thread, and the others, are not "brand" judgements, but "model" judgements, and each one deserves to be judged on it's merits.

The parts on bold are the ones I agree with. It's a fallacy, as I stated in the thread before, to judge individual parts based on the whole. There's no subjectivity in saying what's a fallacy or what's not, it's a fact.

I'm personally not judging if you like the car or not, Famine. I don't have any problems with that. It's the way you voted the car for that bothers me.

Then, Toronado replied:

Where is the logic in you passing objective judgments over a person's subjective and arbitrary reasoning in response to a subjective and arbitrary topic?

Well, Toronado, why don't you say that to Famine? I travel back to the infamous Ford SportKa thread, where some of the most extensive arguments I have ever seen appeared.

ugly awkward slow ugly ugly slow ugly small ugly

Added to that my inherant dislike for European Ford products, my ingrained dislike for hatch backs, and my inbuilt aversion to FWD... and this is one biblically hateful car in my opinion

And yet no part of that is a barrier to it being cool...

What's this? Why can Famine judge the Genesis on the sole basis that it's a Hyundai, and MatskiMonk can't judge the SportKa based on the fact (since it's his opinion, right Famine?)...

In the matter of subjectivity every opinion is fact.

...that the car is ugly, awkward and slow?

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think that both are in the same conditions to be judged. Whenever you are making a subjective statement, you can be criticized both subjectively and objectively.

 

[Famine]

Wow. I guess I upset you recently since you're now travelling thread to thread just to disagree with me.

I'm personally not judging if you like the car or not, Famine. I don't have any problems with that.

Good, since I haven't said whether I do or not.

It's the way you voted the car for that bothers me.

Why?

Must everyone agree with you on what makes a car cool?

What's this? Why can Famine judge the Genesis on the sole basis that it's a Hyundai, and MatskiMonk can't judge the SportKa based on the fact (since it's his opinion, right Famine?)...

...that the car is ugly, awkward and slow?

Being ugly doesn't make something uncool - check out the Holden Monaro (with nostrils), Pontiac Firebird (with nostrils), Escort RS Cosworth (with bulges and the most ridiculous spoiler since the Superbird Roadrunner), MG XPower SV (whew) and Lamborghini Countach (designed to have mumps by someone with a ruler) all sitting in the Cool section. And, for that matter, the SportKa. And the very pretty Rizk DBR2 replica in Uncool.

Being awkward doesn't make something uncool. I have no examples because I have no idea to what he was referring.

Being slow doesn't make something uncool. The fastest car we've ever voted on is in the Seriously Uncool section. The Mini Cooper 1.3i and Golf Mk1 GTi are both in cool and neither is any use past 100mph. The Bigfoot Monster Truck is there also and is geared to about ten. And there's three separate muscle cars in cool which would be embarrassed over a flying mile by a Ssangyong Musso.

And on the same basis, being good doesn't make something cool. We've only actually been asked to vote on one bad car so far, and that's rated "Sub-zero" currently.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think that both are in the same conditions to be judged. Whenever you are making a subjective statement, you can be criticized both subjectively and objectively.

Except when there is no objectivity in the subject matter.

 

[Joey D]

Being ugly doesn't make something uncool - check out the Holden Monaro (with nostrils), Pontiac Firebird (with nostrils), Escort RS Cosworth (with bulges and the most ridiculous spoiler since the Superbird Roadrunner), MG XPower SV (whew) and Lamborghini Countach (designed to have mumps by someone with a ruler) all sitting in the Cool section. And, for that matter, the SportKa. And the very pretty Rizk DBR2 replica in Uncool.

Being awkward doesn't make something uncool. I have no examples because I have no idea to what he was referring.

Being slow doesn't make something uncool. The fastest car we've ever voted on is in the Seriously Uncool section. The Mini Cooper 1.3i and Golf Mk1 GTi are both in cool and neither is any use past 100mph. The Bigfoot Monster Truck is there also and is geared to about ten. And there's three separate muscle cars in cool which would be embarrassed over a flying mile by a Ssangyong Musso.

And on the same basis, being good doesn't make something cool. We've only actually been asked to vote on one bad car so far, and that's rated "Sub-zero" currently.]

I was starting to doubt if anyone else really knew how to judge cool, I'm glad to see someone else understands.

 

[Jondot]

What's this? Why can Famine judge the Genesis on the sole basis that it's a Hyundai, and MatskiMonk can't judge the SportKa based on the fact (since it's his opinion, right Famine?)...



...that the car is ugly, awkward and slow?

MatskiMonk is allowed to think whatever he wants about the SportKa. The subsequent argument wasn't about his decision to class it as uncool, but about the fact that he'd brandished it as 'slow'. Which a considerable number of people disagreed with.